You've missed the point here a bit tbh

I will address this as it's obvious you're referencing me, at least in part.

When I write "agenda", I'm not talking about how EVERYONE has their own unique perspective. That would be ridiculous, because we all see the game differently to varying degrees. There are posters on here who are critical, but I never suggest they have agendas, because they tend to be very consistent and are fair and balanced with their approach to ncfc discussion on here.

There's nothing wrong with having a critical point of view, everyone does. But there's a sensible way to go about the club's methods on and off the pitch. Concerning those who are sensible: When those posters disagree with it and it fails, they will criticise and rightly so. When it works they will admit the club knew better. When they agree with it and it works they will give praise. If their own ideas are used by the club they will admit that the club tried its best but it wasn't a good idea, with hindsight. There's absolutely nothing wrong with any of that. That's sensible, balanced, mature discussion.

However, some people post on here from a perspective of total negativity and seem blindly against how the club is run, or at least how aspects of it are run, to the point that they will constantly change nuanced positions and even contradict themselves just to maintain this kind of propaganda. As an example, we've seen it in recent weeks with the same posters moaning about negative approaches, before praising the recent system change that led to yesterday's result. Then those same posters criticised the club for that approach, completely failing to acknowledge that they themselves were wrong. That's not healthy at all and only creates a toxic discussion on here, just for the purpose of s**tting on the club.

Similar goes to those types of posters moaning about a lack of investment, who again slated the club for the new academy financing strategy this week. It wasn't the "right" type of investment, so it was a problem. Very little balance in terms of saying "well it's not the most ideal approach, but at least they're trying something". It was a case "the club are s**t blah blah blah."

I think there's quite a clear distinction there. If you can't see the difference between those two approaches, then I'm not sure what else to write in order to explain it?

Posted By: Common Sense Police, Mar 11, 13:42:05